Cost-effectiveness analysis of stand-alone or combined non-invasive imaging tests for the diagnosis of stable coronary artery disease: results from the EVINCI study

Aim: This study aimed at evaluating the cost-effectiveness of different non-invasive imaging-guided strategies for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in a European population of patients from the Evaluation of Integrated Cardiac Imaging in Ischemic Heart Disease (EVINCI) study. Methods and results: Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed in 350 patients (209 males, mean age 59 ± 9 years) with symptoms of suspected stable CAD undergoing computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) and at least one cardiac imaging stress-test prior to invasive coronary angiography (ICA) and in whom imaging exams were analysed at dedicated core laboratories. Stand-alone stress-tests or combined non-invasive strategies, when the first exam was uncertain, were compared. The diagnostic end-point was obstructive CAD defined as > 50% stenosis at quantitative ICA in the left main or at least one major coronary vessel. Effectiveness was defined as the percentage of correct diagnosis (cd) and costs were calculated using country-specific reimbursements. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were obtained using per-patient data and considering “no-imaging” as reference. The overall prevalence of obstructive CAD was 28%. Strategies combining CTCA followed by stress ECHO, SPECT, PET, or stress CMR followed by CTCA, were all cost-effective. ICERs values indicated cost saving from − 969€/cd for CMR-CTCA to − 1490€/cd for CTCA-PET, − 3092€/cd for CTCA-SPECT and − 3776€/cd for CTCA-ECHO. Similarly when considering early revascularization as effectiveness measure. Conclusion: In patients with suspected stable CAD and low prevalence of disease, combined non-invasive strategies with CTCA and stress-imaging are cost-effective as gatekeepers to ICA and to select candidates for early revascularization

Multicentre multi-device hybrid imaging study of coronary artery disease: results from the EValuation of INtegrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischaemic Heart Disease (EVINCI) hybrid imaging population

AIMS: Hybrid imaging provides a non-invasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion. We sought to evaluate the added clinical value of hybrid imaging in a multi-centre multi-vendor setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fourteen centres enrolled 252 patients with stable angina and intermediate (20-90%) pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), CT coronary angiography (CTCA), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Hybrid MPS/CTCA images were obtained by 3D image fusion. Blinded core-lab analyses were performed for CTCA, MPS, QCA and hybrid datasets. Hemodynamically significant CAD was ruled-in non-invasively in the presence of a matched finding (myocardial perfusion defect co-localized with stenosed coronary artery) and ruled-out with normal findings (both CTCA and MPS normal). Overall prevalence of significant CAD on QCA (>70% stenosis or 30-70% with FFR 640.80) was 37%. Of 1004 pathological myocardial segments on MPS, 246 (25%) were reclassified from their standard coronary distribution to another territory by hybrid imaging. In this respect, in 45/252 (18%) patients, hybrid imaging reassigned an entire perfusion defect to another coronary territory, changing the final diagnosis in 42% of the cases. Hybrid imaging allowed non-invasive CAD rule-out in 41%, and rule-in in 24% of patients, with a negative and positive predictive value of 88% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients at intermediate risk of CAD, hybrid imaging allows non-invasive co-localization of myocardial perfusion defects and subtending coronary arteries, impacting clinical decision-making in almost one every five subjects

Multicentre multi-device hybrid imaging study of coronary artery disease: results from the EValuation of INtegrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischaemic Heart Disease (EVINCI) hybrid imaging population

Hybrid imaging provides a non-invasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion. We sought to evaluate the added clinical value of hybrid imaging in a multicentre, multivendor setting. Fourteen centres enrolled 252 patients with stable angina and intermediate (20-90%) pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Hybrid MPS/CTCA images were obtained by 3D image fusion. Blinded core-lab analyses were performed for CTCA, MPS, QCA, and hybrid data sets. Haemodynamically significant CAD was ruled-in non-invasively in the presence of a matched finding (myocardial perfusion defect co-localized with stenosed coronary artery) and ruled-out with normal findings (both CTCA and MPS normal). Overall prevalence of significant CAD on QCA (>70% stenosis or 30-70% with FFR ≤0.80) was 37%. Of 1004 pathological myocardial segments on MPS, 246 (25%) were reclassified from their standard coronary distribution to another territory by hybrid imaging. In this respect, in 45/252 (18%) patients, hybrid imaging reassigned an entire perfusion defect to another coronary territory, changing the final diagnosis in 42% of the cases. Hybrid imaging allowed non-invasive CAD rule-out in 41%, and rule-in in 24% of patients, with a negative and positive predictive value of 88 and 87%, respectively. In patients at intermediate risk of CAD, hybrid imaging allows non-invasive co-localization of myocardial perfusion defects and subtending coronary arteries, impacting clinical decision-making in almost one every five subjects

The 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases Criteria for Infective Endocarditis: Updating the Modified Duke Criteria

The microbiology, epidemiology, diagnostics, and treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) have changed significantly since the Duke Criteria were published in 1994 and modified in 2000. The International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) convened a multidisciplinary Working Group to update the diagnostic criteria for IE. The resulting 2023 Duke-ISCVID IE Criteria propose significant changes, including new microbiology diagnostics (enzyme immunoassay for Bartonella species, polymerase chain reaction, amplicon/metagenomic sequencing, in situ hybridization), imaging (positron emission computed tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, cardiac computed tomography), and inclusion of intraoperative inspection as a new Major Clinical Criterion. The list of "typical" microorganisms causing IE was expanded and includes pathogens to be considered as typical only in the presence of intracardiac prostheses. The requirements for timing and separate venipunctures for blood cultures were removed. Last, additional predisposing conditions (transcatheter valve implants, endovascular cardiac implantable electronic devices, prior IE) were clarified. These diagnostic criteria should be updated periodically by making the Duke-ISCVID Criteria available online as a "Living Document.

The 2023 Duke-International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases Criteria for Infective Endocarditis: Updating the Modified Duke Criteria

: The microbiology, epidemiology, diagnostics, and treatment of infective endocarditis (IE) have changed significantly since the Duke Criteria were published in 1994 and modified in 2000. The International Society for Cardiovascular Infectious Diseases (ISCVID) convened a multidisciplinary Working Group to update the diagnostic criteria for IE. The resulting 2023 Duke-ISCVID IE Criteria propose significant changes, including new microbiology diagnostics (enzyme immunoassay for Bartonella species, polymerase chain reaction, amplicon/metagenomic sequencing, in situ hybridization), imaging (positron emission computed tomography with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose, cardiac computed tomography), and inclusion of intraoperative inspection as a new Major Clinical Criterion. The list of "typical" microorganisms causing IE was expanded and includes pathogens to be considered as typical only in the presence of intracardiac prostheses. The requirements for timing and separate venipunctures for blood cultures were removed. Last, additional predisposing conditions (transcatheter valve implants, endovascular cardiac implantable electronic devices, prior IE) were clarified. These diagnostic criteria should be updated periodically by making the Duke-ISCVID Criteria available online as a "Living Document.

Detection of significant coronary artery disease by noninvasive anatomical and functional imaging.

BACKGROUND The choice of imaging techniques in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) varies between countries, regions, and hospitals. This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness study was designed to assess the relative accuracy of commonly used imaging techniques for identifying patients with significant CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 475 patients with stable chest pain and intermediate likelihood of CAD underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging by single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and ventricular wall motion imaging by stress echocardiography or cardiac magnetic resonance. If ≥1 test was abnormal, patients underwent invasive coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined by invasive coronary angiography as >50% stenosis of the left main stem, >70% stenosis in a major coronary vessel, or 30% to 70% stenosis with fractional flow reserve ≤0.8. Significant CAD was present in 29% of patients. In a patient-based analysis, coronary computed tomographic angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve being 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.94), sensitivity being 91%, and specificity being 92%. Myocardial perfusion imaging had good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve, 0.74; confidence interval, 0.69-0.78), sensitivity 74%, and specificity 73%. Wall motion imaging had similar accuracy (area under the curve, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.65-0.75) but lower sensitivity (49%, P<0.001) and higher specificity (92%, P<0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging and wall motion imaging were lower than that of coronary computed tomographic angiography (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In a multicenter European population of patients with stable chest pain and low prevalence of CAD, coronary computed tomographic angiography is more accurate than noninvasive functional testing for detecting significant CAD defined invasively. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00979199